Here are the transcripts with a few highlights to help the analysis along.
Analysis Question: Does he reliably report what happened to Pearl, or is there more to the account in which he is not reporting?
PAUL: The day it happened we …. It was a Sunday. Emmm… we were both in the process of getting up, Gem was …. I think Gem was changing or feeding Ace as far as I can recall and then she came ….. again burst in through the door, daddy swings and daddy park, so she daddy swings and daddy park. I was delighted because she never asked me to do that. She never says daddy swings and daddy park. It’s only just .. over the moon and I …..we were up early because I was in rehearsals for a play ..eemmm .. and … errr so part ..(unintelligible) and they start around 10:30 and I said daddy work now and daddy come back and we go to the park with the swings, so I said to Gemma, “I’ll go to rehearsals and get her ready by the time we come back” and we discuss what park and I said take her to the park (unintelligible) you know the big park or there’s a park just up from my mom’s there just at the top of main square. I went to rehearsals. Emm ..I joked with Anthony Van Gogh the writer of the play emm .. because I’ve learnt all my lines and everyone else says and I joked about the fact, I’m too good for this lot. I said can I go early? I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park. I said I’m .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave. I never leave so early cause it’s a great company and it’s a great cast and we have a good laugh but that day it was so strange because I just wanted to get out to there, like I said knew my bet I want to the park with her. Came home, Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works. Jumped in the truck, off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog. . emm..she went to climb up the stairs and I said “no”, she always / at my mom’s she take like a little drum on to the first step and sits there and taps it and I said no not up the stairs. So it all comes to what if facts. If I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I let her climb up another step, you know ..aaah
Please note the very lengthy introduction.
Take special notice of any information that appears irrelevant.
Note who is named first in the statement.
Note under what context the victim's name is finally used.
Note the quality of social introduction of Rolla.
GEMMA: because she’s she’s never, to put in context, she’s never here on Sunday afternoon because Paul’s out at band practice or rehearsals whatever. We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here.
PAUL: She’s never here, so unusual, she shouldn’t have been here.
GEMMA: She should have been having Sunday dinner.
PAUL: And I said I had Ace, and I said I’m gonna walk him to the park cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog. My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house. The driveway just come up off on to the pavement from the main road, so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel cuase she was , she was never one to run, she was only just, she hadn’t been long walking so, you know she was …
GEMMA: She was late to walk, she was 17 months.
PAUL: Ya and it was yeah, she wasn’t one of these children to walk off, she would just walk, she plodded along. She was by my knees and she was only a dot, she’s only a tiny little thing you know and she was on my left hand side and we got 3 foot, 3 feet from the curb and I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand, then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted , ummm.. to stop and realised there was nobody in it, let her hand go and grabbed her coat. I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall ..umm.. the wall came down and the wall snatched..
GEMMA: You could move her quick enough.
PAUL: So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough. The wall took her from me. I can’t say any more.
GEMMA: I was in the retail park buying bedding (pause) such an insignificant thing to be doing and Paul rung me and I thought he said Terry which is Paul’s dad. So I come rushing up from the retail park to the scene where the wall fell expected it to be my father-in-law when it’s Pearl in the road. I got there before the ambulance and anything arrived.
Gemma crying: Ok no I can go on. (responding to interviewer) She wasn’t airlifted, that was widely reported. The air ambulance did come but she went by ambulance but she wasn’t airlifted. (some of this was unintelligible). They worked for ages.
PAUL: They worked on her at the scene for ages. She died in my arms, she died instantly from the incident that I had to drag her from. She was gone in my arms and I had to put her on the floor. But they took her then in the ambulance and we were in the police car that escorted the ambulance. And there was a crash team and all the staff were waiting at the hospital and then the doctor came through then and told us she was no longer with us which I knew anyway because of what I had seen and ..emm.. they proceeded to pump us full of Diazepam because we’re beside ourselves.
GEMMA: They kept Ace overnight for observation.
PAUL: They keep Ace in for obs. And we were all in the same bed together (long pause) through the night.
GEMMA: The staff at Prince Charles were absolutely amazing, they literally cordoned us off, wouldn’t let anyone in. They kept the chapel open for us ..(pause) open till midnight.
PAUL: (beginning is unintelligible, I think parroting Gemma on praising the hospital) between the births and the deaths of our children they’ve been amazing.
GEMMA: They kept the chapel open till midnight err.. didn’t want us to be on our own, they were really awesome.
PAUL: The kindness, the love, the spirit the general coming together of a community through such a tragic circumstance. Somebody actually compared it to Aberfan
GEMMA: (unintelligible) people who could have been from that era (Aberfan disaster). Phone calls from mothers of children who were killed in the Aberfan disaster. Saying “I couldn’t even image how you feel, we had each other. That this happened to your little girl and you’re on your own.” She knows lots of .. she is the same age as my mother. The mothers who lost children in the disaster. Like you know, we can’t even imagine how you are feeling. I went to the Carphone warehouse yesterday to start a phone contract and I had to sit on the floor in floods of tears cause a guy I knew from school I hadn’t seen him since asked me how many children I had instant. You know he didn’t know. I haven’t seen him since I was in school.
PAUL: I was in Kroger (?) getting some stuff for the shop err .. and a little girl coming round the corner in a pink coat pink boots pink hat, I said HIYA HIYA I literally screamed OMG and the mother must have been frightened and grabbed the girl and I had to run around the corner. I couldn’t cope with it and all the little girls the other day in Tesco (?) walking around in their Halloween costumes and stuff it ..I just with that birthday, Gemma said the other day the birthday it’s for hers, her first birthday. (unintelligible) wasn’t here but Christmas
GEMMA: it’s for everyone, it’s his first Christmas.
PAUL: Gotta be strong and entertaining as we can be. (Talking over each other)
GEMMA: It’s not going to shape his life we don’t want him to be the kid who’s sister died. You know he needs as much normality as possible and we are going to strive to do that as much as we can. Christmas is going to be horrendous but it’s not going to be horrendous for him.
434 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 434 Newer› Newest»noun
1.
the state of being inert; disinclination to move or act
The above describes the commenters who are soooooooo self-righteous and soooooo self-absorbed to the point they think their weak minded opinions will change the outcome of the catastrophe listed in this blog post.
The following details what REAL science has to say about the subject:
http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/force_inertial.htm
I was going to ask if he got high at play practice. In one place Gemma describes his Sunday afternoon activities including the vague word "whatever"; he declares "we have a good laugh" at the play practice. He asks "can I leave?" But in another place tells Gemma to get Pearl ready for when "we" get back.
Anon @10:01 AM
Do you have a link for that?
Sorry the comment at 12:03 was posted on the wrong thread.
Happy Uk - that is not the house belonging to the offending wall, no. The wall was not on the family's property - they were just walking past when the wall fell - it is a few houses from the grandmother's house on Heolgerrig.
Not that "...band practice, whatever..." and "we had a good laugh" are code for drug use, but why even say these things in this narrative? Why did they enter their minds?
Peter - I'm hoping that is the case, and that he is like he is due to guilt at apparently not doing what he said he was - taking Pearl to the swings, when the accident happened.
I have not tried to analyse it yet, I am just picking at random bits. Confused at coroner's comments - he surely must have a cause of death from the pathologist which is consistent with the wall falling, and the coroner wants to establish exactly how the accident happened - would seem a bit rough to prosecute the owner of the Range Rover, unless the car had failed its MOT, or he was aware of a fault.
I read in one article that the police are reviewing CCTV from the retail parks. I read the Range Rover owner had just returned from shopping when he parked the car on the drive. Gemma also said she had been to the retail park. I wonder what or who they are looking for in the retail parks.
Paul Black admits of having had a drink problem in the past.
Peter @ 11:45,
Regarding your first question in the previous article, I think more information is needed to draw a conclusion.
I am leaning toward an accident, with deception involving substance use and a staged accident to cover up a tragic accident involving Rolla dragging Pearl out of mom's drive into the street.
Paul has had a hard life.
If her death was due to dog attack then it would be clear at autopsy that she had been bitten.
There would be puncture marks from the bites whereas if death was from the wall there would be crush injuries and probably no penetrating injuries.
Even if the crush injuries covered the bite wounds there would still be evidence in the underlying tissue.
I suspect he was under the influence either drink or drugs.
It was interesting that he said she burst in the room, it is sensitive to him so what was he/they doing?
Early morning snuggles?
Hair of the dog?
Drugs?
It was sensitive enough for him to introduce it in the process of free editing.
What happened after she burst in?
Stairs also seem sensitive
His focus seems to be on the dog as well,why?
Everyone seems to get appropriate full introductions except his daughter, why?
Is he the bio father
Does he have a history?
Were the family known to CPS?
There seem to be areas of deception but do they relate to the event or do they relate to something else he doesn't want known?
Yes, great points about dog bites/autopsy, Tania.
I'm thinking not so much dog bites, but dragging, involving Pearl and a tangled lead.
Pearl was also "on the lead"?
More information is needed.
I also wondered about substance abuse, with the back and forth about not moving fast enough, and the line about being "over the moon". Did he actually get sent home because he wasn't in condition to rehearse? What other indicators should we look for? Hair of the dog is an interesting thought.
It's apparent there are massive holes in the relay of the day. Why spend so much time on the early hours, and skip over entering his mom's home (if they did), being at the park (as most reports put them on the way home). None of that indicates to me that the accident itself didn't play out as reported.
I wonder if Rolla misinterpreted Pearl as a threat to her master when Paul told Pearl "no" about climbing the stairs.
Blogger tania cadogan said...
Were the family known to CPS?
interesting question. my guess is they knew of him but there is no report. sometimes you meet a person and figure somethings are better left unsaid.
In the confusion, could Paul have tripped over Rolla, spilling Ace into the street and causing him to be unable to rescue Pearl?
Was stepdad Terry involved? Gemma beings him into the account.
That is a great question. Would explain a lot. Such as the odd belief that taking a walk with two babies (sans stroller) and an unleashed dog was a reasonable course of action. Could even have slowed down his reaction time as far as snatching Pearl out of harms way.
Why would Paul lay Pearl down on the road/floor after she "died in his arms"?
Gemma said when she showed up that she saw Pearl lying in the road.
This might sound crazy but why did he say Pearl "heeled"? I dont believe she was alive at that time, but could it be leakage that he has put her on a leash in the past? Some parents do put their kids on leashes when thry take them out in public.
Also, WHICH door did Pearl burst in through? He does NOT establish where he is located in the house (living room, bedroom?) when Pearl bursts in through the door.
Scanning back in my head through previous cases, have we heard "door" mentioned within the first 30 sec of statement? There is that one case where the Mom said the door to the outside was ajar, and didnt that case indicate sexual abuse?
Why does he mention that his Mums house had no gate between the driveway and the road? This is completely unnecessary info so why does he mention it? Is he thinking of some other driveway that does have a gate?
1 1/2 yr olds do not "burst in through the door"
1 1/2 yr olds do not "heel"
1 1/2 yr olds do not "plod along"
1 1/2 yr olds do not get "snatched" by a wall
It's in the context of the dog not being on a leed.
PAUL: And I said I had Ace,
and I said I’m gonna walk him to the park
cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead
and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog.
When I hear "I had Ace", I think of all the times my family was preparing to get ready to go out when my kids were younger. My husband and I would announce as we would be going out the door to get in the car to begin the family outing that I've got so and so meaning I'm out so you have the rest of the family to follow. Could he have left Pearl on the stairs by mistake, returning to a more familiar routine without Pearl since she was never there on Sundays?
There is also something off about the way he jumps into details about his left and right while "transferring" Ace.
Paul: Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works.
Jumped in the truck, off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog. . emm..she went to climb up the stairs and I said “no”, she always / at my mom’s
she take like a little drum on to the first step and sits there and taps it and I said no not up the stairs. So it all comes to what if facts. If I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I let her climb up another step, you know ..aaah
I have been stuck on this part: she always / at my mom’s
Was she sitting on the steps at Grandma's house? He says he goes to his Mom's to get Rolla (pause) and suddenly Pearl is sitting on the stairs...
Excerpts from my transcription (with rearranged insertion in italics):
Paul: Um. She went to climb up the stairs, and I said no. She o- Uh, at my mom’s she takes like a little drum on to the first step and sits there and taps it. Um. I said no, not up the stairs.
Paul: So it’s, it all comes to what if facts, or maybes, you know, if I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I h-, if I let her climb up another step, you know. Ah.
Gemma: Because she- she’s never, to put it into context, she’s never in your care on a Sunday afternoon.
Paul: Exactly, yeah.
Gemma: Because Paul is always at band practice, or, um, at a rehearsal, whatever. We, pack up uh, we go down to my parents, for the afternoon. Then we have lunch, so she’s never here. [crosstalk]
Paul: She’s never so... She shouldn’t have been here.
Gemma: She should be having her Sunday dinner.
Paul: But she died in my arms. She died instantly, from the incident, that I had to drag her from. She was. She was gone in my arms and I had to, put her on the floor.
Paul: Um. And I said I, had Ace, and I said I’m going to walk him to the park, because Rolla’s so well behaved. He’s he’s always. He’s off the lead and Sunday at that area is, is relatively quiet and, I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s, he’s to heel and, he’s a, well trained dog and. My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house. The driveway just comes off on to the pavement from the main road. So, like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel. Um. I had Ace in my left arm.
I still have a hard time to believe that Pearl was already death before the wall collapsed. And even though it still could be an accident, even if deception is shown, hearing him describe the situation does make me think he could be charged for endangerment of a child.......people have been convicted for this type of situation before, like not having the right equipments for the child they travel with or taking care of.
So it's absolutely important to know what the situation exactly was and if he indeed wasn't fast enough to handle or if he was distracted by something else. (his unleashed dog for example), there would be a difference I would think.
Very good points!
"Door" is extremely sensitibe due to missing info
Where was Pauls location in house when Pearl "burst" through door?
What was going on behind the door?
Fyi, 1 1/2 yr olds do not actually talk the way Paul is claiming...they would not say "Daddy park" "Daddy swimg". A) The speech is too sophisticated and B) at that age, they do not "remember" the park and ask to go there.
"Jumped in the truck", off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog.
Where did the truck go?
Where were the kids?
Another thing. About standing by that wall.
Why did he "command" Pearl to take his hand?
If they were coming back from the park they already had to have crossed the street to be standing on that part of the pavement. If they had to cross the street because they were going to the playground and told her to take his hand, why doesn't he say that?
There seems no reason for him to command her to take his hand if she had "plodded" along with him the time before they reached that corner ("and she wasn't one to run away")......so what was the reason why he told her that?
And if he had a car with him to get his dog, why didn't the go to the playground with this car?
But then again this could be question he asks himself too if it really is a terrible and horrific accident, then you will blame yourself for life I would think, at least I would, If I had failed to safe my child from death......it would be a lifelong blaming myself for failing
I think Paul is stirytelling
"Peppa shirt, Peppa jeans, the works": WHY would he mention the brand name of Pearls clothes
"Sitting on the first stair and would tap like a drum"
"Ploddding along, right by knee, she was just a dot"
"The wall snatched her"
"Died in my arms"
STORY TELLING
Even his claim of seeing a little girl in pink dress, pink boots, pink hat is, again, STORYTELLING.
She was gone in my arms and I had to, put her on the floor.
At the same time he had "trown away Ace", did he leave him on the street while holding Pearl in his arms still he put her on the floor?
For someone who's telling so much unnecessary details of the day itself, while his recollection of the whole event is very vague and raises questions (if you want to question it, instead of assuming the truth is told)
If the truth as told is true there will be nothing to doubt it, it will be clear and clean, and facts will be facts.
But in this case questions are there, if the coroner isn't even able to determine cause of death, then you can't assume the truth has been told......at least I can't.
Does he say "SHE burst through the door"?
Could "she" be the mother, not Pearl?
Did the Mom burst through the door & see or do something?
Right Habunda. Paul threw Ace into the road & then lay Pearl in the road.
Personally I think the whole story is a tall tale to coverup Pearls death.
Seriously why would he even give a crap what she was wearing & what brand name?
Something to think about...
Peter: Note under what context the victim's name is finally used.
Paul: I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park
Context: the parts of something written or spoken that immediately precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning.
"word processing is affected by the context in which words appear"
Precede: I said can I go early?
Passage: I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park.
Follow: I said I’m .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave.
There is something significant here. Peter has told us so. I don't have the answer as to how his words, before and after,clarify the passage. Perhaps another commenter well-versed in principle can assist.
In SA if someone mentions the color of something it means they handled it. Wouldnt that be true of brand names too? Did Paul dress Pearl? Is that why he remembers exactly what she was wearing and what brand?
I'm guessing he mentions what clothes she had on because the image of her, in death is seared into his mind.
Paul: I think Gem was changing or feeding Ace as far as I can recall and then she came ….. again burst in through the door
Anon@5:09: I had similar thoughts. The word "again" doesn't have a discernible meaning.
ima,
It could be when he says "Pearl" that that is a truthful part of narrative.
Or, what Springs to mind is one time on Dr Phil he had on a woman who had been severely abused as a child & within the family, her nane was nit used, she was referred to as "her". But probably outside the family her name would have been used if she came up in convo.
Ima, interesting. Another thing I wonder could the "door" have been a closet door? Linguistically, Paul is concealing both his location in relation to the door as well as Pearls. Why? Could it have been a closet? Maybe she was put in the closet for punishment? Or was hidden in the closet?
If someone locked me in a closet or, at Pearls age even if there was no lock, she probably could not turn the door handle, I would want to "burst" through the door."
OT
I came across this case
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/mother-greenacres-girl-missing-since-1984-please-stop-suffering-and-find-little-girl/b8y1alpsnXkp1GGyRqGMCJ/
Haven't been able to find more information, but reading "mom was taking a nap", made me think can there be more to this story? Or has she been abducted by a stranger?
I think Pearl was at some point, put in a closet. Was a blanket put in there that she soiled? Hence the need to buy new bedding.
Note: Gemma was feeding or changing Ace, not Pearl.
@Anon
It could be when he says "Pearl" that that is a truthful part of narrative.
Yes, He also could have just wanted to leave for other reasons and used a truthful statement to validate leaving. Paul goes to extremes in his description of the fun he has in rehearsal and complimenting his co-workers. I believe the irrelevant event description is meant to speak directly to his group and their "commitment" to each other, gravitating to unity and loyalty.
Ima, yes I agree. All it tells us is that that may be the truth about what he SAID to the play people.
Also, I just noticed Paul does not mention Pearl wearing a coat until he "grabbed her coat" when the vehicle is coming towards them.
Why does he say "I had my head like this"?
Did something hit him on the head?
Was he in a confined space?
Look at his body language describing his actions when vehacle starts coming at them.
Paul: Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works.
I'm assuming (always a bad idea) the peppa coat is what Paul is referring to.
As to the body language, I'm unable to view the video -stupid iPad- my comments are purely based on transcription.
John McGowan ~ where are you? He's the go to guy for body language knowledge.
I agree with others that the word "plodding" to describe a toddler walking is strange. Kind of derogatory. I think it indicates Paul was annoyed or impatient because Pearl was not keepin up with him and the dog. Perhaps he let Pearl get too far behind and that is where his withheld information lies.
I got to thinking about the dog.
His dog was at his mom's house, why?
Was the dog sent to stay at his mom's house because his wife got pregnant and didn't want the dog in the house any more in case it bit the baby?
The dog had to be gotten rid of and rather than re-homing with a stranger an agreement was made between his wife, himself and his mom that the dog would be re homed with the mom and he could continue to visit it and walk it etc.
He didn't want to get rid of it because he loved it.
Was the dog at his mom's because it had snapped at or nipped one of the children since children are very grabby and don't recognize the signs that a dog is getting stressed out by being mauled around.
He didn't want to lose the dog so it was re homed?
He speaks of Pearl heeling which is something i would expect a dog to do and to refer to a dog doing, I would not expect a child to heel an adult.
This speaks to me of control issues.
He boasts of how proud he is of his dog being well trained and trusted to walk off a leash, is this the way he expected his children to walk?
Pearl was new to walking and would still be a bit wobbly and slow and would struggle to keep up with an adult walking at an adult pace.
Could this have been an issue, she wasn't heeling, wasn't as well trained as his dog and he was angry, perhaps pulling her to keep up or snapping at her to hurry up?
there seems to be distance between himself and his daughter Pearl, was she a cause for resentment?
Having children would mean responsibilities, use of his time, preventing him from doing everything he wanted or having what he wanted?
If he had her hand, why did he then let go of her hand to grab her coat?
Why not use her hand to pull her towards him?
Given the ages of the children with him, why was he not using a stroller for the youngest?
He could not have been in control with both arms in use, one to carry the youngest and the other holding Pearl's hand as well as having an unleashed dog with him (I would never walk an unleashed dog no matter how well trained as they could spook at a loud noise or be distracted and run into the road/run off)
Where was the dog during and after the accident?
This part doesn't make sense:
like I said knew my bet I want to the park with her
I never leave so early cause it’s a great company and it’s a great cast and we have a good laugh but that day it was so strange because I just wanted to get out to there, like I said knew my bet I want to the park with her.
Transcription problem?
Paul: so I said to Gemma, “I’ll go to rehearsals and get her ready by the time we come back” (we?come back)
and we discuss (present tense) what park and I said take her to the park (unintelligible) you know the big park or there’s a park just up from my mom’s there just at the top of main square.
(if this is being discussed, what was the agreement?the big park or the one up from his mom's?)
...missing information...
I went to rehearsals.
We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here.(present tense) (probably?)
https://goo.gl/maps/2CoVYofFqKA2
Overlooked this driveway.........my fault.........would this car be the car that demolished the wall?
Some quote's found in articles
"Pearl was every single star in every single sky, she was as bright as the stars, when she looked at you with those eyes and she would melt your heart."
"She was the reddest pearl in the ocean and the sweetest melody ever written"
"She was the greatest dancer and she has left a massive hole in our hearts, the world will be a darker place without her. She was the reason we all lived."
'I've had people helping me refurbish the shop and I've laughed quite a bit, but I knew I was going to come down with a crash. That happens every day - the guilt I felt for forgetting her for one second.'
“We know nothing will ever be normal again,” added Paul. “It can come from nowhere and get you in a chokehold. I was physically floored last Saturday, my legs had gone and I couldn’t stand up. I cried so hard.
“Merthyr gets a very bad press sometimes but when the chips are down they stick together."
“The number of things that have been done on our behalf to raise money such as the eight-hour 30km walk from Brecon to Merthyr in mountainous terrain, which included jumping in muddy puddles (because Pearl was a huge fan of Peppa Pig), that was amazing, the band day in the Crown (pub), the massive bike ride, but there’s been lots of little things too."
“It’s going to be all about the tattoos and creating a legacy for Pearl. We’ve changed the name to Pearl’s Tattoo Emporium featuring Ace tattoo removal because we’re going into tattoo removals as well.”
“She was so intelligent, so clever, and so funny,” added Paul. “That is why I wanted an extravagant send-off because I always said she was going to be a star. She would have been a famous mathematician, scientist, actress, whatever she would have wanted to do, she would have been brilliant at it.”
“I don’t think I’ve ever been so proud of anyone or anything as I was of Pearl that day,” he said. “Even in that little white casket I was proud of her. I’m still proud of her every day and I’ve learned to love her a little more. She was our superstar.
“I was the first one to pick her up, I was the first one to hold her, and I wanted to be the last one to hold her.”
“I was so proud to carry her,” he said. “It wasn’t the girl I left with on that fateful Sunday morning.
"It wasn’t her in her little Peppa coat, her Peppa jeans and her Peppa wellies, it was a different little girl in that box. Pearl had gone then. Pearl had flown to wherever paradise is."
“It was tough but also one of the proudest moments of my life, but at the same turn the most horrific moment of my life."
“I’ll never feel pain, I’ll never feel hurt as much as I’m hurting now."
“No man should ever have to see that happen to his little girl in front of his very eyes. Nothing in my life will ever be as hard as this.”
One local mother told reporters Mr Black tried to save his daughter from the runaway vehicle.
She said: “Paul threw himself into the way to try to save her. It was very brave but he didn’t have a chance against such a heavy Jeep. They are a lovely family. Paul is well known in the area because he was on The Voice. He does a lot of singing around here.”
He never said he threw himself into the way to try to save her.........did she witnessed the accident?
https://www.instagram.com/p/BdNW9b0lyKJ/
Doesnt that couch look as the couch they sit on in interview? Or am I wrong?
https://twitter.com/Paulblack7/status/893059524730511361
.
'I've had people helping me refurbish the shop and I've laughed quite a bit, but I knew I was going to come down with a *crash. That happens every day - the guilt I felt (not FEEL) for forgetting her for one second.'
*Crash: coming down from a "high" on drugs. usually where the really good feelings start fading away, and you get tired.
I’m still proud of her every day and I’ve LEARNED to love her a little more.
“I was so proud to carry her,” he said. “IT wasn’t the girl I LEFT WITH on that fateful Sunday morning.
Ima.grandma- Paul had said he knew his lines better than the others as a reason he should get to leave early. In the line you quote, I think "bet" should be "bit", meaning he knew his part in the play.
Was Pearl on the other side of the wall? Otherwise he’d be saying that the car hit Pearl. Also, I can see why he’d say the wall took her if he was holding her hand, but the went to grab her coat, and the wall moved her away from him when it fell. I think it’s just crazy to think he was walking down the street with his son, dog, and Pearls dead body. Who wouldn’t notice that?
Plod along- "to move at a slow, steady pace"
Plod- "to walk with slow heavy steps"
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/license/amp/dictionary/british/plod_1
He's describing her ability to walk in her own but that she isn't likely to run off. The word/phrase seems appropriate to me.
The "... the guilt I felt for forgetting her for one second." is new to accounts I've read so far.
It seems as if maybe he was so focused on the dog, he could have forgotten her, not paying attention for a few moments. Bad accidents can happen so quickly with little kids.
The comments about being proud of his dead child are strange, grief or not.
Buckley, I think you are probably correct with (bit) instead of bet. I thought it could have meant to be (pet).
...I want to the park with her. I'm assuming (a no-no) he meant I want to go to the park with her.
Hobs, Paul's speech does indicate his most valued (higher ranking) relationship was with "Rolla, my Boxer dog".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/voice-star-used-body-human-10944650
Snip:
"Something like this is just out of everybody's hands and no one could have known it was going to happen.
"There was a bike show on the weekend so there were lots of cars on the road. It was a jeep that ran Pearl over.
*****"She was standing near to the bus stop when the handbrake came off and hit her. It's awful.
"Paul threw himself into the way to try to save her. It was very brave but he didn't have a chance against such a heavy Jeep.
She said: "There were loads of people here on the weekend for the show so no one knows who the car belongs to.
"It's nobody's fault, just a tragic accident."
Rewatch the section of the video describing the vehicle coming: Grab Daddys hand tight tight tight
My head was down like this
Heard a noise
Let go of her hand and grabbed her coat
I think that all of that occurred in a CLOSET and something fell from a high shelf and hit his head & then hit her head, killing her. Her coat may have even been hanging in the closet when he grabbed onto it.
Please stop. If you start a gofundme for SA training, I will donate.
4:16 in video: He gestures upwards over his head when he indicates where the vehicle was coming from.
Something fell off of a shelf in a closet and hit Pearl on head and killed her.
8:08
I'm better at this than you think lol. I haven't seen you make any extremely important deductions using SA that took the FBI months to figure out. I know what I'm doing.
Why does he gesture OVER his head to indicate where vehicle was coming from?
Look at it yourself. Paul reaches OVER his head and makes a gesture of pulling his hand down to indicate how the vehicle came towards them lol. He is not thinking about a vehicle coming towards him when he makes that hand gesture. He is thinking of something else happening ie. an object falling most likely.
I am good at picturing what people are thinking in their head when they are talking even if it is quite different than what they are claiming.
Another Anon, ha ha! I will also donate.
Reading the transcripts (as well as everyone's comments), I'm kind of wondering:
-why he felt the need to include all the broken information about where he was prior to the "incident" and about leaving early
-why Gemma and Paul both felt the need to explain where they "normally" were on Sunday
-why Paul went into all of that about the stairs at his mom's and his dog's behavior
-what do all these kind of random details have to do with Pearl actually being crushed by the wall? They seem kind of random and unimportant to the actual event, yet they're important enough to Gemma and Paul that they're included in their narrative.
-Is it because they're sensitive to what happened at the house (an argument- Gemma wanted to go shopping without the kids, but Paul wanted to hang out with his friends?), what condition Paul was in that morning/day and on into the afternoon?
-Is it sensitive because it's the only "safe" part of the day (random, seemingly unimportant details) they can tell authorities/the public without repercussions or fear of prosecution? Withholding information?
I think it's odd that Paul says Pearl never ran. Did she run? Judging by what Gemma said, Paul wasn't super involved with Pearl and accustomed to taking care of her regularly. Perhaps he was unaware that she was in the trying-to-run developmental stage or she had actually learned to run a little and was unprepared for her to "run". They seem to spend some time and energy discussing her walking ability. I'm surprised there's no mention of physical therapy. If Pearl walked late, the steps at his mother's (or any steps for that matter) would have been a situation requiring parental supervision= extra time, careful attention from a parent/adult, patience, and a teaching. Pearl also likely would have broaching or been in the "me-do" stage, wanting to do things for herself (perhaps sparking Paul's comments on how well-trained his dog is and the off-leash remarks).
Some advice: When looking at this case in particular, do not allow Paul to direct you in his tall tale to believing he has moved to another location beyond wherever the door is at his home, unless his statements that he is traveling to another location are believable.
Right now I have him in his home near the door that Pearl "burst" through unless someone can present to me a RELIABLE statement from him that he has gone to another location.
He gives a fairly reliable statement that he went to rehearsals although he does not specify whether it was on that day.
I do not believe he went to his Mum's. If you listen, he does not tell us he went to his Mum's. Listen to the video.
He does not tell us he went for a walk. Listen to the video.
Hmmm, interesting, I have him "over the moon" and it is confirmed by his arm motions that perfectly replicate the moon's orbit. From the moon, he was able to use his massive ego to change the moon's trajectory just enough to change the tides, create a huge gust of wind over Wales that, as he intended, jostled the Jeep enough to send it crashing into the wall and perfectly cover up the drug-induced, dog-mauling, closet-object-crashing, bedding-destroying actual incident that killed his daughter, Pearl and got Paul the media attention he had been craving.
he was able to use his massive ego to change the moon's trajectory
That's funny! Yeah the guy's full of BS, huge ego and wearing a pink corsage at his daughter's funeral like he's going to the prom.
Nice challenge anon @ 8:59. Very nice.
I've re-read from the beginning. I'm not taking you up on this one. It's interesting how perspective can be sparked from logic and reasoning. I'm interested to read the responses.
Well it's oneeeeeee for sorrow,,,and a twooooo for..... Tragedy!! When you've got no soul..Tradgedyyy....
Anonymous@9:20
Love it! At last, mystery solved. Absolutely love it! It's fun to smile. :)
Blogger ima.grandma said...
Nice challenge anon @ 8:59. Very nice.
I've re-read from the beginning. I'm not taking you up on this one. It's interesting how perspective can be sparked from logic and reasoning. I'm interested to read the responses.
the body was under the wall or near the wall. where the ambulance picked it up.
Listen to the tape, and follow his words.
He reliably (somewhat reliably) tells us he went to rehearsals.
"I went to rehearsals."
Although, he also says previous to that: "We were up early because I was in rehearsals" which makes it sound like he was at rehearsal EARLIER than he claims.
Going to his Mum's: Not reliable.
"Jumped in the truck. Off to my Mom's to get Rolla, my boxer dog."
That is NOT reliable. He does NOT say that he went to his Mom's. Dropped pronouns. The statements are NOT reliable, and every single person here knows that!
Going for walk: Not reliable. In fact, the statement below is outright deceptive with multiple SCAN sensitivities! Below is the complete sentence where he implies he's walking to the park. TWO highlighted SCAN words in that sentence, making the words sandwhiched between them DECEPTIVE! Isn't that what it would mean???
"And I said, I had Ace, and I said I'm gonna walk him to the park, ****BECAUSE**** Rolla is so well-behaved he's, he's always off the lead and Sunday up that area is relatively quiet and I've only got to click my fingers and he's, he's ****TO**** heel and he's a well- trained dog, and my Mum hasn't got a gate on her house.
I highlighted the TO bc what he means is "TO get him to heel"...he clicks his fingers to get him to heel.
So what does that mean if there are 2 highlighted SCAN words in a sentence? Doesn't that indicate WHEN the crime occurred???
CAn someone tell me what is the SCAN rule for 2 highlighted words in a sentence?
He didn't walk Ace to the park. He did something else and something bad happened to Pearl or had already happened.
He;s concealing WHY he said that he was going to walk Ace to the park. It was a ruse.
He is hiding something about WHY he said he was going to walk Ace to the park. It wasn't because his dog is well-behaved, it wasn't because it was relatively quiet, it wasn't because his dog heels when he clicks his fingers.
WHY was it???
FYI anon re:SCAN
https://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/search?q=2+blue+in+one+sentence
According to the SCAN technique, of which all Statement Analysis is based upon: We give "so, since, to, therefore, because" the color coding blue as the highest level of sensitivity that can be found in a statement of someone reported what happened.
It is here that the person has a need to tell us "why" something was done. This is a need to explain that makes it very sensitive. Instead of just telling us what she saw, she has a highly sensitive need to explain why she did something, and even more sensitive:
Why she did not do something.
The blue coloring shows sensitivity. When it comes together with others, it is the most highly sensitive part of a statement.
This is often the solving of a case. A single "blue" is a strong sensitivity indicator but two or more "blues" is called a "cluster of blues" in which the information contained with the cluster is the most critical information of a case. Just as we highlight "left" in blue, we highlight "because" in any form that seeks to explain why something was done.
Thank you for your question, I always benefit from a refresher of information.
Anonymous said...
Listen to the tape, and follow his words.
I understand what you are saying.
he does put himself 3 foot from the curb:
"and we got about about three foot from the curb - three feet from the curb, and I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand and as I was doing that I bent down to say “Daddy’s hand now, tight, tight, tight” -
he then puts himself in the police car following the ambulance:
"and we were in a police car that escorted the ambulance and there was a Crash team and all the staff were waiting at the hospital"
he uses "we" appropriately. the thing I see is that there is a lot of missing information a lot of unnecessary sentences. I think it can be concluded that things don't appear to have happen as the narrative implies due to this missing information and language. more questions than answers.
Corrected link for my post to Anon re:SCAN
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-last-time-hailey-was-seen-alive.html
I'm sorry, I gave you my search criteria link in error.
Anon - I don't think 'to heel' is 'to' as In reason why - it's how the dog was walking, at his heel - the phrase is 'walk to heel' - or just 'to heel'. Would you highlight the 'to' in 'stand to attention'? I think you wouldn't - it's the same use of 'to', which is used in an order.
Ima, Thank you VERY much for the SCAN info!
I have been trying to figure this out in my head what is being concealed. I do believe, as according to SCAN that the info in the below statement is highly sensitive and may help solve the case: (also, note that "I HAD Ace" is in PAST tense)
Paul: "And I said, I HAD Ace, and I said I'm gonna walk him to the park, ****BECAUSE**** Rolla is so well-behaved he's, he's always off the lead and Sunday up that area is relatively quiet and I've only got to click my fingers and he's, he's ****TO**** heel and he's a well- trained dog, and my Mum hasn't got a gate on her house.
What I did was think of an analogous statement that I made up:
"And I said, I HAD Sally, and I said I'm gonna drive her to the library, ***BECAUSE*** my car is so great, it drives so well and Sunday that area is relatively slow traffic and I've only got to tap my foot on the brake ****TO*** make the car stop and it's a very well-driving car, and my Mum hasn't got a gate on her house."
What I am getting after making up my own analogous statement is that I think the deception and sensitivity is ******regarding the mode of transportation Paul took to the park*****. I don't think he walked. Because when I wrote my own analogous statement in which I am driving to the library, I feel the deception is in the fact that I did not actually take a car.
Ima thanks again for the info. So very interesting!
Hey Jude I don't agree.
He says "I've only got to click my fingers and he's he's TO heel."
He is clicking his fingers in order to get the dog to heel.
If he said "I've only got to click my fingers and he's he's TO sit." He is clicking his fingers in order to get the dog to sit.
The "to" should be highlighted.
Gen Malaise, I agree with everything you wrote, and honestly, the "3 feet from the curb" is suspicious. Yes, because of the use of "3" in the context of all the missing info and unnecessary sentences as you pointed out.
he had to be in from the road so the three feet is important. if only one or two feet in the wall would have fallen short. the scary implication is that he feels he needs to tell us he is precisely far enough in. why?
if it was an accident why would he mention this. it is not as part of fate, the stair and the rehearsals were his objects of fateful timing not being three feet in from the curb.
Seems as though Pearl was NOT right next to him as he has stated. I think this shows that she was running ahead of him or even out of eyesight when the accident occurred.
I don't understand that, Anon. Also he didn't say that's what he did at that time, he said that's all he has to do to get the dog to heel - 'I've only got to click my fingers and he's to heel'.
What if he had, alternatively said, 'I've only got to click my fingers and he's sitting'. What would you highlight there? 'To heel' is not a reason why, it's like saying "he's heeling', except no-one says it like that. 'To heel' is how people say it - the dog walks 'to heel.'
What Jude says about "to heel" makes sense after googling the phrase...it's not common in American English, but is in UK, I now see it doesn't mean "stop" but "stay close by".
And Anon has misquoted the line..."snapping fingers" and "to heel" are not together in the transcript up top.
cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog. My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house. The driveway just come up off on to the pavement from the main road, so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel cuase she was
If Paul Black had reacted immediately when he saw the car coming towards him and moved out of harms way, instead of wasting valuable time by screaming expletives (which he "obviously can’t say on camera") at the car, Pearl may still be alive.
His language indicates that he did not move but stood his ground until the car was close enough for him to realize that it did not have a driver and therefore cound not respond to his cries to "stop" and whatever other words he shouted that he "obviously can't say on camera".
I'm a bit stuck on the words that Paul Black "obviously can't say on camera". Why can't he say? In the context of describing his daughter's final moments before her death, he is suddenly coy, inviting the listener to imagine what he said to the car, almost jokingly, rather than simply telling us what he said. It is expected that his emotions were high. He would be forgiven for saying any four letter words under the sun. So why does he censor himself in such a way? Why not simply tell us what he said? Was it one word? Was it two? Was it a torrent? He shouldn't have said anything at all. He should have moved out of the way.
----------------------
I'm surprised Paul Black didn't include venue, matinee times and ticket prices for his new show, in the interview.
He would be forgiven for saying any four letter words under the sun. So why does he censor himself in such a way? Why not simply tell us what he said?
Do they allow phrases like "stop the car, you f**king c**t" on British news shows? Definitely a no no here in the states.
I'm pretty sure that Brittish News shows have a "bleep" button, Buckley. The main point is that shouting "stop the car you fucking cunt" (or whatever he said) and then, presumably, waiting to see if that imprecation worked, wasted time. The secondary point is that even words that are "a no no", when said as, what could be called, an excited utterance, become acceptable. Certainly, in a court of law, Paul would be asked to recall the exact words he uttered, moments before Pearls death.
So what if he had said " stop the car you effing c"? He appears to care more for the delicate sensibilities of his TV audience, than the recounting of Pearls death.
Buckley, YOU ARE WRONG! I TRANSCRIBED IT DIRECTLY FROM THE VIDEO!!!!! THE TRANSCRIPTION YOU POSTED IS WRONG. LISTEN TO THE VIDEO, AND YOU WILL SEE I AM RIGHT.
Heres another analagous statement:
"I said I had Sally, and Im gonna go to the mall and buy some clothes with cash BECAUSE I have a great wallet and the cash fits in it so nice and it fits so well in my purse and I I only have to turn the little metal thing on it to
get it open right away and my purse has no zipper on it."
I didnt pay with cash did I?
Paul didnt WALK to the park did he? Did he drive?
Further, I think in that made up analogous statement, maybe someone else bought me the clothes but I am hiding it?
Did someone else drive Paul to the "park"?
Did Paul STEAL a car to drive on his way to the park??
Paul: "Um. She went to climb up the stairs, and I said no. She o- Uh, at my mom’s she takes like a little drum on to the first step and sits there and taps it. Um. I said no, not up the stairs. So it’s, it all comes to what if facts, or maybes, you know, if I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I h-, if I let her climb up another step, you know. Ah.
...
But she died in my arms. She died instantly, from the incident, that I had to drag her from. She was. She was gone in my arms and I had to, put her on the floor."
I believe the sensitivity around the dog's behavior is that Rolla is well trained, as opposed to a 22 month old who was excited to go to the park and climb steps with her Daddy. However, this regularly off-hands/off-duty father didn't understand that 22 month olds don't follow commands like well trained dogs. Pearl wanted to climb a step and Paul "said no." Paul expected obedience at the click of his fingers. I believe he used unnecessary and accidentally deadly force in snatching and dragging Pearl from the step to bring her "to heel", i.e. obedient submission, instead of letting her climb another step.
I believe the vehicle crash was staged as a cover-up, possibly with assistance from stepfather Terry.
I agree with others that the sensitivity around the dog is that he knows, with hindsight, that he had his hands too full ... walking with two under two's AND a boxer dog... meaning he was more distracted by the dog than he wants to admit.
Also, he knows he was breaking the law in the U.K. for walking a dog off lead on the streets and he may have had critism on social media for this since the accident... in their extra comments thrown into the narrative, they seem to be addressing various questions and critisms that have come up over the past few months...
I still think it was a freak accident , wrong place at the wrong time and their grief is overwhelming...Gemma obviously supports him and knows he loved Pearl and wouldn't have deliberately put her in harm's way... she possibly feels guilt that she didn't accompany them to the park and chose to do chores e.g buy bedding ( ' such an insignificant thing ' ) ... she must feel , could she have helped?.. that could explain the emphasis on ' daddy park' , ' daddy swings'.... convincing not only herself , but everyone else that Pearl only wanted Daddy to take her .
My heart still aches for them... there can be nothing worse than the death of your child .
It's "it all comes to what ifs, buts, and maybes" - not facts. I don't know if 'what ifs, buts and maybe/s' is an expression used in American English - it is a term used in the U.K.
Buckley, thanks for looking up 'to heel' - I assumed it is also used in American English - I shouldn't assume, and I hope your clarification also helps clarify my reasoning to Anon.
I also have wondered if there was a pre-history of anti-social behaviour concerning the dog, of which there had been complaints, which could account for the sensitivity and his over-explaining how well trained Rolla is, and stressing how much support the community was giving - unnecessary in extent, IMO, as everyone would have been devastated at what happened to Pearl. It is as if he is overly ingratiating of himself with everyone in the community for their support, where the support would already have existed. I think that's at least partly to do with his letting the dog walk off leash, maybe also not picking up after it, and letting it into children's play areas - choosing to take Pearl to one where there were unlikely to be other children, Google Street View shows it as remote, right at the end of the housing area, even so there could have been complaints. Well, he couldn't have intended to pick up after the dog, having, by his own account, two babies, the dog, and no pushchair.
^ TooManyWaWa's - I think it more likely there were complaints about his dog walking habits before Pearl died - he said the dog always walked to heel and was well behaved - that's the usual justification for disregarding the law and the safety of others, other dogs, and passing motorists - any dog can act out of it's usual behaviour. I think that is on his mind - either that his attention was more on his dog than on Pearl, or that people will believe that was likely to be so, thus his need to enlist the support of the entire community in order to preclude criticism that the habitually off-leash dog either did, or might, have distracted him from Pearl just as the vehicle rolled down and hit the wall.
Those are thoughts rather than analysis, I have yet to attempt that. He joked his baby walked to heel - that's a mind blocker.
Paul: "And I said, I HAD Ace, and I said I'm gonna walk him to the park, ****BECAUSE**** Rolla is so well-behaved he's, he's always off the lead and Sunday up that area is relatively quiet and I've only got to click my fingers and he's, he's ****TO**** heel and he's a well- trained dog, and my Mum hasn't got a gate on her house.
The word because in this sentence has nothing to do with the first part of the sentence. What does 'I had Ace, have to do with the behaviour of his dog?
Is it known where he and his wife live? Where his mother lives? How far are both residents away from the place of the accident site?
"we got 3 foot, 3 feet from the curb"
does got means they were in motion? Not standing still, would that have to be 'were' if they were standing still?
Jumped in the truck....(what kind of vehicle do they have?)
Still wonder who called 911......Paul doesnt say he did,
https://twitter.com/Paulblack7/status/950092872992174081
Thought he had said something like........'there will be nothing in my life that will be harder then the lost of my child'
Yet 5 months later he 'finished his most emotionately charged month' (since his princess Pearl 'left')
Habundia - his mother lives about three doors down from where the wall fell. HappyUK posted a google link and a YouTube which shows it, yesterday.
Keep looking - he posted a pic of Rolla in the bed of a brown pick-up truck, onTwitter, I think in December. I don't know if you could fit two baby seats alongside the driver seat- don't know the type of seating in a pick-up truck - they are not much on the roads here. He didn't say how he got the babies to his mum's - he didn't actually say he jumped in his truck and went there - he omitted the pronoun.
Cant seem to find a reaction of HappyUK with a link in it, been through it twice......will see if i can find it later on.
If someone can find the link.......please post it again.........so i dont have to search again LOL
Heres another analagous statement:
"I said I had Sally, and Im gonna go to the mall and buy some clothes with cash BECAUSE I have a great wallet and the cash fits in it so nice and it fits so well in my purse and I I only have to turn the little metal thing on it to
get it open right away and my purse has no zipper on it."
I didnt pay with cash did I?
Anon, in this example, I can't say you paid with cash, nor can I say you didn't.
"not reliable" means just that, we can't say it's a reliably truthful statement, it doesn't mean it's definitely an outright lie or the opposite of what's suggested.
Blogger Buckley said...
Here's another analogous statement:
Buckley, I think a lot of people take unreliable as deception. it may or may not be deception.
I'm going off the transcript posted by Peter at the top; the video isn't working for me.
Gemma mentions the odd detail of having been out buying new bedding when the "incident" happened.
Is the new bedding actually on the bed? Returning home, learning your toddler has died, I can't imagine taking the time to make her bed, open up the new packaging, etc.
The element of time seems to be a priority within Paul's verbalized perception of reality. This leads me to believe "time" is more important to him than the event itself .
time is not only important, but it is "sensitive" due to the repetition with wanting, needing to leave.
we were up early because I was in rehearsals for a play .
.eemmm .. and … errr so part ..(unintelligible) and they start around 10:30
...
Paul: I said can I go early? I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park. I said I’m .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave. I never leave so early
(unnecessary information) cause it’s a great company and it’s a great cast and we have a good laugh
but that day it was so strange because I just wanted to get out to there
Habundia wrote
Paul: "And I said, I HAD Ace, and I said I'm gonna walk him to the park, ****BECAUSE**** Rolla is so well-behaved he's, he's always off the lead and Sunday up that area is relatively quiet and I've only got to click my fingers and he's, he's ****TO**** heel and he's a well- trained dog, and my Mum hasn't got a gate on her house.
The word because in this sentence has nothing to do with the first part of the sentence. What does 'I had Ace, have to do with the behaviour of his dog?
Very good point!
I feel there is very little that is truthful in that statement from Paul.
It is his mind struggling to construct the fabricated scenario of him allegedly walking to the park from his Mums. His brain is like "OK lets picture what it would be like if I was walking to the park with Ace, and Rolla, and oops I forgot to mention Pearl, but I'll throw that bit in later when I describe her plodding along and heeling.
Some pivotal part of the crime occurred at that point where he claims to have been at his Mums.
Did stepDad Terry help him stage the accident like one poster above siggested?
I think it is likely.
ima, Good point about time being sensitive. Well, if he had a dead body on his hands that could make time VERY sensitive for many reasons.
Re: My post at 2:01, The reason why he fails to include Pearl in his initial verbal set-up of the "walking to the park" story may be because she was dead & that would cause his brain to be very avoidant about mentioning her in his intro to who he had woth him while walking to the park.
Note that when he does finally introduce Pearl into the "walking to the park" scenario he describes her as "plodding along". "Plodding" is a slow, heavy, almost zombie-type way of walking...not full of energy, not full of life like a toddler that age would be. Is it because she was already dead?
Every single case, I notice the already deceased victim will be described as being some variant of "very tired"....ie. Maddy McCann was described as "very tired" "leaning on my knee".
Pearl: "Plodding along" "By my knee" "she was just a dot".
"time" and "location" themes seem to be the underlying essence of both Paul and Gemma's language.
Pearl's actions in Paul's story:
(Burst) through door
(Said) "Daddy park Daddy swing"
(Likes to sit) on step
(Tried to climb) up step
(Was to heel)
Plodding
(Was by my knee)
(Was just a dot)
Do those alleged actions indicate the presence of a living toddler? In my opinion, no, they dont.
Ima, very true.
Context? Could this be an example of using a truthful statement to deceive?
Precede: I said can I go early?
Passage: I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park.
Follow: I said I’m .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave.
Anon at 2:39
Opinions not predicated on SA principals are just that, opinions.
Give the SA principals under which you think the language indicates Pearl was dead before.
I'm stuck on the "time" aspect.
Two reactions seize people in the face of a horrific event.
The first is shock, the second is a rush into activity.
The timing of this premier public speach comes shortly after the inquest on October 4th. Paul does give short comments immediately after, mostly repeating his scripted devotion to Pearl. The inquest was announced to convene on December 8th. He had little time to speak to persuade public opinion and prepare a trial run for the new inquest. The timing is suspect.
Several have commented on the parents' use of the word "incident" instead of accident or something else. I agree it sounds very aseptic and odd coming from the parents of the victim. But I wonder if it is possible they are parroting the language of first responders, law enforcement, lawyers?
Paul: [X] Came home. Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works. [X]Jumped in the truck. [X] Off up to my mom’s to get Rolla, my boxer dog. Um, she went to climb up the stairs and I said, “no,” she go ov-at my mom’s she takes like a little drum on to the first step and sits and taps it. (Sigh) (mom closes her eyes and exhales,) Um, I said, ‘No, not up the stairs.” So its, it all comes to what if, buts, and maybes. You know, if I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I ha-if I let her climb up another step, you know, uh…(mom trying not to cry)
Gem: Because, sh-she was never, to put it into context, she was never in Heolgerrig on a Sunday afternoon. (exactly, yeah). Cause Paul is always at band practice, or um with rehearsals, whatever. We pack up and go down to my parents for the afternoon and we ha-we have lunch. So she’s never here (she’s nev, it’s so unusual) She shouldn’t have been here. (She shouldn’t have been here.) She should have been t-having her Sunday dinner.
__________
Gem had "her" ready. He doesn't say, "Pearl was ready to go." He doesn't assign any sort activity or dialogue to Pearl. Gem had "her" dressed in "the works". i.e., took extra special care to dress her in her favourite character themed clothing. Paul doesn't say anything "bad" happened to Pearl on the bottom step at his mom's. He simply leaves "the end" of his story to our imagination, i.e., what if, buts, and maybes. He withholds what happened.
That Sunday was "so unusual". "Within context" of a typical Sunday, something ("so unusual") kept Gem and the kids from going to her parents for lunch. According to Paul, they decided *before* Paul left for rehearsal (so before 10:30am) that they would go to the park after rehearsal. Paul said he left rehearsal "so" early. That would put him back home before lunch.
There is no discussion about having lunch after he got home/before they left for the park. They only mention lunch "in context" of where Pearl should have been. (At Gem's parents.)
This report says the accident happened at 1:39 (maybe that was when 999 was called? ) Police say the Range Rover, which was unoccupied, rolled down a hill at an address in Heolgerrig, Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales, and into a wall at 1.39pm on Sunday.
Read more at https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk-news/2017/08/07/world-a-darker-place-after-death-of-one-year-old-pearl-in-car-incident/#3C6F2C20cgAM1kJa.99)
Again, reports are conflicting. Paul said: "They keep Ace in for obs. And we were all in the same bed together (long pause) through the night."
But this witness reports seeing Paul at the site that Sunday night http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/girl-aged-23-months-killed-runaway-range-rover-rolled-hill/
Nic, I read the same witness report two days ago but my mind didn't click with the transcript. I've read the transcript several times since, still no lightbulb above my head. Thank you. The dynamics of group thoughts are connecting rationalities and will always ignite curiosity. Result: truth seeking progress.
Anon said
Anon at 2:39
Opinions not predicated on SA principals are just that, opinions.
Give the SA principals under which you think the language indicates Pearl was dead before.
Well, one major principle I'm using is that if he does not say it, we can not say it for him.
Begin with his location and Pearl's location at beginning of the story. Why does he conceal it?
If a toddler burst through a door, would he not say that "she burst through the door into the living room? (Within that statement would be revealed his location as well as hers--him in the living room and Pearl entering from whichever room was separated from the living room by the door.
In his statement "She burst through the door" he conceals his location as well as hers, yet there IS a door!!! Why would he conceal where the door is? Well, the only reason I can see is if it was a closet door and Pearl was either locked in there as some kind of punishment or her dead body was in there.
If he cannot say I cannot say it for him.
He introduces "door" almost IMMEDIATELY in his statement. This makes "door" VERY important, yet Paul does not tell us WHERE the door it. WHY??? What possible reason would he need to conceal the location of "door" unless whatever had been or was happening behind that door NEEDS TO BE CONCEALED and also why would he conceal the location of the door unless by telling us the location, suspicion would be placed on him ie. if it was a closet door, or perhaps a basement door.
Immediately in his statement, he conceals Pearl's location. WHY?
When he tells us what Pearl "said" in the concealed location, he repeats it twice, making it VERY sensitive and most likely deceptive.
She said "Daddy swings. Daddy park." "Daddy swings. Daddy park."
Listen to the video: he says it twice.
And then of course, how "delighted" and "over the moon" he was.
When Pearl again enters the narrative, (when Paul returns home from rehearsals), she does not act, she does not smile, speak, run to Daddy. Paul tells us what she was wearing along with the brand name of the items of clothes she was wearing.
No sign of life at that point!
No sign of life from Pearl in the truck.
He does not reliably tell us that he was at the Mum's so I cant say it for him.
However, he implies that at the Mom's "she tried to climb a stair and he said "NO"!
(This is story-telling.) He follows this statement by telling us what Pearl "always" (typically) does on the stair, not what she was doing THAT day. Do you notice, he does NOT say that Pearl was tapping a drum THAT day? Why not???
There is no other sign of life at that point from Pearl.
Pearl again enters the narrative as an afterthought during the "taking a walk" portion, during which Paul laughs as he says that "Pearl was to heel" (this is not an action that a toddler does, therefore it is NOT reliable.) He then says that Pearl was "plodding along". Again, that is not an action a toddler does. I have never seen a toddler "plod along".
So, where in Paul's entire narrative do we get linguistic evidence of a living, breathing Pearl? And in fact, where within his narrative do we even get reliable info about her location? The entire narrative begins with her location concealed from the listener.
I need to read Nic's comment, looks interesting, but I gotta get dinner on table first.
Plod along- "to move at a slow, steady pace"
Plod- "to walk with slow heavy steps"
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/license/amp/dictionary/british/plod_1
He's describing her ability to walk on her own but that she isn't likely to run off. The word/phrase seems appropriate to me to describe how a toddler walks.
I have seen toddlers burst thru doors because they use too much force unnecessarily, banging the doors against the walls or whatever is behind it. Just because you've never seen it doesn't mean it hasn't ever happened.
Same with "plodding along."
He also can't speak to every question YOU have.
Your are coming to conclusions that are not borne out in the statement, just what you continually read into it.
Has any of Peter's input even remotely suggested Pearl was dead before going to the park?? No, none whatsoever.
And again, in the U.K., "to heel" doesn't describe an action, it describes a location or position.
Also, note when Paul says "she TRIED to climb a stair and he said No" that is not an actual action. She did not climb, she only "tried" to "climb" up a single stair. Then Paul tells us what she "usually does" on the stair. Why not tell us what she was doing that day? Was she tapping the drum that day? NOt according to Paul's statement.
There is no actual action done by Pearl at the Moms. Only trying to do an action.
Anon your train of thought is conistent. I'm listening...
^Consistent
listening... and thinking
It's consistent in everything; sexual abuse of kids and being dead before the actual crime. Every. Single. Time. Even when Peter tells her how wrong she is.
Anon 5:14,
Tell me of ONE substantiated action within the narrative that Pearl does that proves she was alive?
The bursting through the door is not reliable, because the door is not situated in time and space, and, in fact, he says "she" "burst through the door", not "Pearl burst through the door".
I need a reliable statement where her location is known and an action is done (not "tried" to do an action) and I guess also "to heel" according to Hey Jude is a position not an action so we can cross that off the list of possible actions from Pearl.
Give me ONE reliable statement in which Pearl acts, does ANY action.
Anonymous said...
Anon 5:14,
I need a reliable statement where her location is known and an action is done (not "tried" to do an action) and I guess also "to heel" according to Hey Jude is a position not an action so we can cross that off the list of possible actions from Pearl.
heeling is an action. it is when a dog walks beside its master or walker matching pace with the human.
"Walking to heel" is an action, but the action is in "walking"; "to heel" is where the dog is while walking. "To heel" is a prepositional phrase, so "heel" is the object of the preposition and a noun. In Paul's language "to heel" is not an infinitive so "heel" is not an action verb.
GeneralP
I would also describe heel as you do. I also consider local "expressions" specific to the area could be in play.
We pack up and go down to my parents for the afternoon and we ha-we have lunch. So she’s never here (she’s nev, it’s so unusual) She shouldn’t have been here. (She shouldn’t have been here.) She should have been t-having her Sunday dinner.
Are lunch and dinner used interchangeably in Ireland? What time is "dinner" in Ireland? In North America we have breakfast, lunch (typically Noon +/-), and dinner (or supper), typically around 6pm (+/-)
Lunch is referred to something they go and do on Sunday afternoons at her parents. But lunch becomes "Sunday dinner" in context of what she (Pearl) should have been having that Sunday afternoon.
Is the change in language regarding a sensitivity to time. I know that sounds rhetorical, but Gem changed lunch (general) to Sunday dinner in reference to what Pearl should have been doing.
Blogger Buckley said...
"Walking to heel" is an action, but the action is in "walking"; "to heel" is where the dog is while walking. "To heel" is a prepositional phrase, so "heel" is the object of the preposition and a noun. In Paul's language "to heel" is not an infinitive so "heel" is not an action verb.
where I am in Canada, to heel is the action. the dog is not walking it is heeling.
For me in the states as well. It means "to stop."
Google it and you'll see in the U.K., "walk to heel" means walk by the owner's side.
I don't see the word "lunch" in the transcript above. Is our transcript that off?
Nic, I havent seen the word lunch until now. The transcript reads as:
Gemma: We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here.
PAUL: She’s never here, so unusual, she shouldn’t have been here.
GEMMA: She should have been having Sunday dinner. .
My experience with the word heel come from a lifetime of being around red-necked coon hunters. They've always used the lone word "heel" to walk beside them while waiting to tree a coon.
Anonymous said...
Some advice: When looking at this case in particular, do not allow Paul to direct you in his tall tale to believing he has moved to another location beyond wherever the door is at his home, unless his statements that he is traveling to another location are believable.
Right now I have him in his home near the door that Pearl "burst" through unless someone can present to me a RELIABLE statement from him that he has gone to another location.
January 7, 2018 at 8:59 PM
She was by my knees and she was only a dot, she’s only a tiny little thing you know and she was on my left hand side and we got 3 foot, 3 feet from the curb and I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand, then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted
“daddies hand now, tight tight tight”
persuading good, attentive father, keeping Pearl safe
something
Paul does not identify what he heard. In retrospect he should automatically refer to the run-away car. He said could hear the noise of "something". The event is not sudden. It is something making a noise that he could not identify over a period of time. Something which caused him to scream when he realized what it was. He doesn't say I heard the car He said, "I looked up and I saw the car coming towards us...."
he screamed at the vehicle, not a who could have been driving the vehicle.
"I obviously can't say on camera what I shouted".
He is limited to what he can say (on camera).
"she died instantly from the incident that I had to drag her from"
I hear "...we have lunch" in the video; the transcript is wrong.
Time is f&cked up. Location is f&cked up in this narrative.
I need ONE reliable statement that Pearl performed an action during Paul's narrative that proves she was alive during that time.
I will listen to video again and see if I can hear one reliable statement regarding Pearl doing an action.
Is there one statement where he uses her name (Pearl) and states that she does any kind of action?
I am relistening to the video to see if there is one reliable action performed by Pearl.
I am noticing a LOT of "nevers" which seem to correspond with the changing of locations, and which also cancel out any possible statements regarding actions done by Pearl (which are not stated reliably to begin with).
Please note: He is literally telling us he is lying by cancelling out everything he says she does by saying right after that she "NEVER" does it!!!
Paul: "She burst through the door and said "Daddy park. Daddy swings. Daddy park. Daddy swings."
Paul: "She NEVER says "Daddy park Daddy swings."
Paul: "She WENT to climb up the stairs." "I said no not up the stairs."
GEmma: "Because she's NEVER in here on a Sunday afternoon...."
Paul: "She's NEVER here, so unususal, she shouldn't have been here."
Paul: "Pearl was walking again (laughs) to heel, cause she was...SHE NEVER WENT...she didn't run...she was only just...she hadn't long been walking.
"She never...she wasn't one of these children who would run off...or she'd just walk...she plodded along."
Blogger Buckley said...
I don't see the word "lunch" in the transcript above. Is our transcript that off?
Yes. Not a lot. If you're listening and stopping and then starting, words and/or stuttering can be missed.
Here at 8:11 (lunch) and then at 8:03 (dinner)
video counts down...
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/were-missing-more-every-day-13828145
Blogger Buckley said...
"Walking to heel" is an action, but the action is in "walking"; "to heel" is where the dog is while walking. "To heel" is a prepositional phrase, so "heel" is the object of the preposition and a noun. In Paul's language "to heel" is not an infinitive so "heel" is not an action verb.
so it appears to be an action there also, the action is "walking to heel". or in short form "to heel". Paul seems to be using "heel" as a verb. and it doesn't alter the analysis in my opinion.
I think you are making too much out of this.
In the UK to heel refers usually to dog walking where a dog is trained to walk at the owners heel (usually to the side or slightly behind)
I don't recall it being used to refer to children.
Parents would say their child was walking by their side and, if young, they would be holding their hand or if slightly older, some use a wrist strap so their children has more freedom of movement but cannot walk too far ahead or lag behind too far and it also means they cannot wander off if busy areas and get lost.
That he refers to his child walking to heel would indicate control and training, not that appropriate to a child rather that appropriate to a dog.
Children are taught to stay close to their parents not to heel (walk to heel)
his language and his prioritizing his dog concerns me and i wonder if he was controlling at home.
How did he discipline his children?
Did he treat his children the way he treats his dog?
A pat on the head and a treat when they obey his commands?
I wonder if he has anger issues?
What happens when they don't do as he says when he says?
He speaks of being 3ft from the kerb which would place him closer to the wall as our sidewalks aren't huge and can vary in width depending on location.
Why would he throw Ace into the road given his age and that there could be other traffic coming?
Why not throw him behind him or into a garden which would be seen as a place of safety?
Why release his daughters hand and then try and grab her coat?
He already had her why not pull her to him or push her out the way?
The split seconds lost between letting go her hand and grabbing for her coat could have made all the difference, in that moment of time she would have been moving away from him increasing the distance.
Something is off, something is missing.
What were the family dynamics before the accident?
As an aside, what size bedding was she buying?
Why was she buying new bedding?
What type of bedding was it?
Anonymous, I don't discount your thought process. Though, the idea that Pearl was already dead isn't a possible scenario I envision or deduct, I appreciate your time in laying out your reasoning re: your belief in a civil manner. It's not easy to go against the grain. :)
ima, can it be that something before he went to his rehearsel happened, but he just had to go to rehearsel because it was already plannened, cancelling it would be difficult without questions being asked. So 'Pearl wanted to go to the park with him, so he could leave earlier.
It wasn't (as he stated before) that he couldn't do any more, you could never practice to much, you're not alone when acting, but because he knew all the lines (even of the other players) he felt that was a good reason to ask to leave, and make up the story that Pearl wanted him to take her to the park.(which she had never done before)
Still i have a hard time thinking he was walking with a death body on the street. Although people are strange creatures and some do some bizar stuff, it was Sunday afternoon, some event was happening nearby, but then again, everything is possible when humans are present.....i can only hope that's not the case in this story and this was indeed a tragic accident in which Paul maybe feels lots of guilt for not protecting his daughter ('as a father is supposed to do'), which made him come up with a story in wich he's also a victim (as the wall snatched' her away from him)
Peter Hyatt said...
To others struggling:
Something else to consider:
In analyzing the statement, could there be points of deception but it still remain an accident?
Human nature is very complex, and situations are often complex.
Peter
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4948104/The-Voice-star-s-daughter-crushed-death-Range-Rover.html
[snip]
An inquest heard police are investigating the incident and that there could be criminal proceedings brought against the car's owner.
Mr Black said today: 'I was there to see the gruesome details but I want to protect my wife from it.
'I haven't been able to tell her what happened, she doesn't know.'
A coroner agreed he would do his best to avoid any 'unnecessary distress' for Mr Black's grief-stricken wife Gemma, 37.
______________
But Gemma was on the scene before paramedics/air ambulance.
Physically, I would be all over my daughter trying to save her. I would have to get physical with my husband if he kept me from my dying daughter. Dead or not, I would lose my mind if I was kept from her.
In fact, Gemma doesn't talk at all about tending to either kids (Pearl under a pile of rubble or the baby which had been thrown into the street).
This is bizarre.
I'm defining it the same way those in the U.K. are. See Tania defining it as "walk at the owner's heel." In that phrase "heel" is a noun, not a verb. If you don't agree, you are quite free to stop "making so much out of it" yourself.
I agree it changes little and that it's odd he uses it to describe his toddler.
I agree he wants us to see actions that he can't commit to. That doesn't mean Pearl is dead, it means the actions he wants us to visualize aren't reliable. Big difference.
He is painting a picture of a responsible father with baby in arm and obedient dog by his side. He wants us to see, in this picture, that Pearl is walking by his side, holding his hand. But linguistically, he hasn't convinced us of this. It doesn't mean she's absent, it means the picture is different from reality. Such as, he didn't have her hand or coat, she was farther from him, he wasn't sure of her last movements because he was paying more attention to the dog and baby.
But assuming she's already dead because the actions aren't reliable is like saying "He never says "I took a breath," so he must have suffocated!"
Speaking to the abundance of the word "never" noted in many comments including my own, I'm reminded of SA principle:
"Never", in an open statement, is vague in time and is "unreliable". Unreliable does not mean deceptive. "Never" is not reliable yet could be truthful.
The guilt, within Paul and possibly Gemma, may be powerful enough to change intuitive instinctive language.
Exactly Buckley.
Blogger Buckley said...
I'm defining it the same way those in the U.K. are. See Tania defining it as "walk at the owner's heel." In that phrase "heel" is a noun, not a verb. If you don't agree, you are quite free to stop "making so much out of it" yourself.
I still think you are wrong. "to heel" is a verb. "walk at the owners heel" is a description of "to heel".
Anonymous Habundia said...
https://www.google.nl/search?q=handbrake+failure+causes&oq=handbreak+failure&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l3.14891j1j4&client=tablet-android-lenovo&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
Someone said he couldnt find anything about failure of brakes.....first it was a failure of handbrake not footbrakes......the link included shows failure of handbrake on many cars, so it does happen.....especially with a 17 year old car I would think
In the reports I've read, they describe the car as an automatic. So if the car was in park, everything is locked. Literally, you would need the key to be able to put the car into RDN12. The emergency brake was also applied and [they] are very clear to say it was fully engaged. That is a double the brakes applied, means two independent brake systems. When you park on the side of the road, you turn your wheels away from the curb (if on the ascent) so that if your emergency brake fails, your car will roll into the curb and the curb will "stop" your car. You turn your wheels towards the curb if on the descent for the same reason. In North America, we don't have "curbs" in our drive-ways, and I don't think this rule applies to parked cars in their drive-way.
The only thing the car wasn't, was locked. So if the car was not tampered with, then aside from removing the emergency brake, someone would have to have had the key to put the car into reverse or neutral, for what happened to happen.
Buckley wrote:
"I agree he wants us to see actions that he can't commit to. That doesn't mean Pearl is dead, it means the actions he wants us to visualize aren't reliable. Big difference."
Buckley, thank you for commenting.
The problem, and it is a VERY big problem, I have with Paul's story is that Paul does not commit to A SINGLE ACTION done by Pearl.
It is one thing if he is making up a bullshit story. It's another thing when there is not a single reliable statement about an action performed ie. Pearl was eating breakfast, and she said Daddy swings. Daddy park."
"Pearl sat on the step and tapped a drum". He does not say that!
"Pearl was carrying her teddy bear."
Give me anything, any reliable statement of her performing an action of any kind.
Unfortunately, Buckley, there are no reliable statements of that kind in the video, and unfortunately, that means ONLY ONE THING.
If the individual in question was alive you would hear a few reliable phrases of actions done. There are none, unfortunately.
if 'to heel'is a verb.....then it suggest an action.
It's an action to me, though not one loving parents use on their kids.
Also the action has a location in it, because the action is specified by 'rules', walking to the side or close behind of it's owner (only slaves are to be owned, if used for humans, and that's a crime these days fortunately)
When used not as a verb it would be a command 'Heel!"
'to' infront of this word makes it a verb (at least that's what i remember from my English language lessons back in highschool) lol
But i could be wrong.
This word is NOT EXPECTED from a loving father walking his daughter to the park she wanted to go to with him, for a swing.......action or verb........it's just not expected imo
Unfortunately, Buckley, there are no reliable statements of that kind in the video, and unfortunately, that means ONLY ONE THING.
If the individual in question was alive you would hear a few reliable phrases of actions done. There are none, unfortunately.
Can you quote what principle of statement analysis you are using to make the bolded statement?
Oh wow. I am listening to the tape again.
Paul does NOT say that "She said Daddy swings Daddy park".
What he says is "She come again burst in through the door. Daddy swings. Daddy park. Daddy swings Daddy park."
He does not say that she said those things.
He does not even say "she burst in through door"
He says "She come again burst in through the door."
I really don't think she is alive at the beginning of the narrative.
@nic.......I don't know automatic cars, but you don't have to put a car in 1st gear to roll down from a steep hill. Seeing the driveway the car rolled-down from it seems like a very steep hil, also the road of the scene lays on a hill, so if the handbrake would not have been set good enough, or be worn out (because of age, 17 years),and somehow snapped.
That's why it would be intresting to know how the car was found.
https://goo.gl/maps/QKBQTKFia9B2
Buckley, it is the principle that I came up with based on Peter's teachings, which are superb. It is the same principle I used to determine that DeOrr was never at the campsite. It took the FBI 3 months to reach the same conclusion I reached on DAY ONE from listening to the parents' statement and using MY PRINCIPLE. To me, it is simply what I have learned from Peter even if it is not an explicit rule.
It is not even a principle I made up. It is just what my brain says to do having learned Peters' teachings.
Habundia- in my school we made it to prepositions and prepositional phrases. "To" was among them. For example, in your post you say "to the park", and in that phrase, "park" is a noun, not a verb.
"Heel!" as a command is indeed a verb and action, (you) heel!
In Paul's statement he says "heel" referring to the dog being at/near his feet, the back part of which is called a "heel."
Anonymous said...
Im not even convinced the dog was with him.
He went to his Moms for some other reason, maybe to get a shovel. Hes just using that as an excuse for why he stopped by his Moms or maybe ge discarded evidence tgere.
Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works. Jumped in the truck, off up to my mom’s TO get Rolla my Boxer dog.
Yes. Nobody asked him if he stopped anywhere on the way to the park, and/or why he was at his mom’s/accessed his mom's. He had a need to say he went and why (to get his dog). Yet, the reason he was going to be "in the neighbourhood” to begin with was because that park (I presume near his mom’s) was relatively quiet on Sundays and it had swings. So why not just say he dropped in to his mom’s to/from the park? Because he needed an excuse to go in? Unless the dog could not be trusted and the dog was at his mom’s for safety reasons. There is absolutely no mention of the dog in any reports or reported by police, or of Pearl being mauled mentioned in the coroner’s report.
"It is not even a principle I made up. It is just what my brain says to do having learned Peters' teachings.
January 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM"
And Peter has repeatedly told you your method is wrong.
Anon 8:50, It is the natural outgrowth of Peter's teachings.
I could have saved the FBI millions and millions of dollars on their pointless DeOrr search if they had only read my analysis that DeOrr was NEVER at the campsite or within the search area.
Peter said,
In analyzing the statement, could there be points of deception but it still remain an accident?
Yes. Especially if either or both felt that the cause of Pearl's death was "neglect".
Hypothetical scenario that would evoke a lot of "what if's"/"but"/maybe if - if Gemma was busy with Ace and she didn't realize that Pearl had followed Paul out the door (to his rehearsal or to take the dog to the park for a run/constitution). And Paul didn't see her follow him to the truck. Or worse, Paul did see her but told her to sit on the step and not to move from it. And then he was too distracted (because of his dog in the front seat excited he was going to the park?), to notice Pearl wasn't on the step (maybe he should have told her to sit on the top step where he could have seen her?) That, in fact she was in harm's way of his truck and in his haste, he accidentally ran over her/dragged her a few feet with his truck (per, he heard "something") and then looked (in his sideview mirror?) but did not realize what he was hearing was Pearl under his truck. That would be "gruesome". (His word.)
Was it the DOOR to the BASEMENT, Paul?
Is that why you mention stairs and telling Pearl not to climb up those stairs?
Did she spend many lonely hours tapping "like a drum", something she used as a drum to pass away the many hours you trapped her in the basement?
Anonymous said...
Anon 8:50, It is the natural outgrowth of Peter's teachings.
I could have saved the FBI millions and millions of dollars on their pointless DeOrr search if they had only read my analysis that DeOrr was NEVER at the campsite or within the search area.
January 8, 2018 at 8:53 PM
It is the natural outgrowth of your histrionics. And wrong, as Peter has said so many times, not only in commenting posts but in thread topics.
Did you treat her like a DOG?
Is that why you laugh when you say she was "to heel"?
Was she tied up in that basement like a dog?
Really 859?
Was it histrionics when I determined on DAY ONE from simply listening to the parents' interview that DeOrr was NEVER at the campsite? NO, it wasn't. The FBI announced that same conclusion after 3 months of searching and investigation and wasting millions and millions of dollars.
It's called talent, something Peter has praised me for, and I do thank him for recognizing my gift!
If you think that this case does not have sinister elements to it, you think it is merely my histrionics, then why SOOOOOOO much deception from Paul?
Why no reliable statements of actions from Pearl?
Why the immediate introduction of the word "door" in relation to Pearl?
Why was the wife buying new bedding?
Sadly, I am just not naive as to what people are capable of, and looking at these cases we see a lot of that dark side of human nature. Its not histrionics.
"...so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel cuase she was , she was never one to run, she was only just, she hadn’t been long walking so, you know she was …"
The above passage is representative of the underlying priority to show an element of timing. (slow, careful, prudent, calm)
Anon @9:02 PM
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
Buckley said:
that Pearl is walking by his side, holding his hand
No, he does not say this. He said he "bent down to say". He doesn't say he took her hand, or that he had her hand. In fact, he was transferring Ace from his left hand to right hand *as* he bent down to say... "daddy's hand". Not, "hold daddy's hand." He didn't yet know there was danger. He could "hear the noise of something" and he had to look up before he could see "this vehicle" coming towards them. Then he screamed at the vehicle, -- not the driver of the vehicle. (In hindsight he now knows that there was no driver, but in that moment, wouldn't he be screaming at the driver "to stop"?) There is a dropped pronoun at "let her hand go". He doesn't say he had her hand, or that he grabbed her coat. He doesn't say he pulled her from the wall before it snatched her. He also doesn't say the wall came down "on" her. He only says the wall came down. He says the wall "snatched" [her] (Gemma talks over him). But he does say he threw Ace into the road.
" I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand, then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted , ummm.. to stop and realised there was nobody in it, [X] let her hand go and [X] grabbed her coat. I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall ..umm.. the wall came down and the wall snatched..
The transcript is not perfect, and there are questions that may arise because of errors. SA analysis is based the precise examination of each word used. Flaws in the written text may result in a faulty analysis. What is the tolerance level for a paid professional?
Paul Black is storytelling. He is telling the story of a devoted, responsible, engaged and involved father. He is a professional actor and entertainer accustomed to both following a script and improvisational speech. His story recounts an idyllic family morning filled with excitement (bursting though the door), ordinary tasks (baby care) and the pull of responsibility (work). He tells the story of a hard working head of household who goes off to the job (rehearsals), meets his obligation to his coworkers and makes an exception to his ethics when he begs off early. He tells the story of a dedicated pet owner and his extraordinary dog. He tells the story of a protective father totally focused on averting tragedy in the face of a freak accident. He tells the story of skilled and dedicated professionals intent on saving a child's life and their efforts to support a grieving family. Finally he tells the story of a community bound by tragedy.
What Mr... Black fails to do is give an accurate and complete account of what happened on the day his daughter died. His focus is mostly on himself, his job and his dog. His family members are included in the story only when necessary and without any personalization of the individuals. He fails to recount the sequence of events in a clear and concise manner. His speech is slow and includes unnecessary detail and information. He often speaks in the negative and offers reasons and explanations that are confusing and inconsistent.
A complete analysis is likely to reveal that Mr.. Black is withholding information and may in fact be deceptive in some areas.
Nic- I said that over 100 comments ago. Read my whole quote:
He is painting a picture of a responsible father with baby in arm and obedient dog by his side. He wants us to see, in this picture, that Pearl is walking by his side, holding his hand. But linguistically, he hasn't convinced us of this. It doesn't mean she's absent, it means the picture is different from reality.
BuckleyJanuary 7, 2018 at 11:23 AM
"If I saw a vehicle bearing down on my daughter I would not release her hand to try to grab her coat."
Agreed and if you look at his language, he hasn't reliably told us he had her hand, but he wants us to think he did:
PAUL: ...then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted , ummm.. to stop and realised there was nobody in it, (dropped pronoun)let her hand go and grabbed her coat. I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall...
Anon@9:26 said:
Paul Black is storytelling. He is telling the story of a devoted, responsible, engaged and involved father. He is a professional actor and entertainer accustomed to both following a script and improvisational speech
Exactly! His closing words to sum up the interview:
PAUL: Gotta be strong and entertaining as we can be.
Paul introduces the setting which is their home, yet he does not tell us they left the home.
In fact, during the stair/drum part at his Mums house, Gemma interupts saying "to put it into context she wasnt supposed to be HERE (at their home)", yet she is supposedly at Pauls Mums house.
Dont allow Paul to take US (THE ANALYSTS) mentally out of the home SINCE IT IS NOT RELIABLE!!!!!
The "stairs" Paul refers to are in THEIR HOME NOT HIS MUMS HOME.
He and Gemma both tell is that.
Are we listening?
Once again.....
Peter Hyatt said...
To others struggling:
Something else to consider:
In analyzing the statement, could there be points of deception but it still remain an accident?
Human nature is very complex, and situations are often complex.
Peter
--
Peter often gives hints along the way.
tania said:
If he had her hand, why did he then let go of her hand to grab her coat?
To take her pulse?
I am sticking to every rule Peter has taught when I say that Paul does not reliably tell us he left the home after rehearsals.
Paul is a lying sack of shit.
Even the Ramseys are better liars than Paul and Gemma.
Paul was "proud" of his daughter for being a different little girl when she was dead. He was proud of her for dying. He is a sicko!!!!!!!!!!
Paul took the time to stylize his (disgusting) facial hair before the funeral. He took the time to adorn his repulsive tatooed body with more necklaces than I own and he put on more rings than I own, He then pinned a pink corsage to his suit like he was going to the prom.
Paul is a liar. Pure and simple. I don't believe his version of the story of what happened to Pearl.
It's interesting unraveling his lies to see what he is hiding, and I think I do see what he is hiding, however I find it much harder analyzing John Ramsey's interviews than Paul's. He is not a smooth liar.
Post a Comment